I'd like to start a thread here, that lists tasks that require maintenance. Could you please inspect my initial list below, and take action on them? I ask, because it is becoming increasingly difficult for me to keep track of them, on my lists! Most are ready to be manually validated, and I would be very happy to help with comparing results, should you request it.

Well, other crunchers have completed tasks and would like to know if the work that was done had results.
I can relate to the feeling of wanting to know about that and I remember clearly that your attitude towards projects with minimal and/or late and/or unsuffiscient response in their forums and minimal and/or late and/or unsuffiscient efforts to solve problems or share information might peak in a forum post on our and/or such projects' forums in which you point out that and why you're unhappy with the situation, and what you think could be done to better this.

Although still uninvolved in crunching due to not getting any tasks (bow to Jacob) I think it would be nice to do validation on a regular base, e.g. after a certain amount of tasks has finished or a certain amount of time has passed, and to announce this procedure as recurring news.
I think a quater-yearly validation interval might be kind of a pulse to show the project's alive and kicking - even if you will just announce that no tasks have been finished.

gemini8 hat geschrieben:Well, other crunchers have completed tasks and would like to know if the work that was done had results.

Same over here at the project leader's desk: I am still waiting for two tasks to be validated (one from 2013, the other from 2014, by the way). So, at least I am not asking for things I won't live up to, myself...
Anyway, we will see, what we can do...

Thank you. I am looking forward to seeing action taken. I agree that quarterly, or even twice-a-year, would be a good goal. When you're ready, I am available to help, any time.
PS: I still have 7 long-runners in progress in BOINC, so I'm not sure why your 2 long-runners make a difference in timing this maintenance.

I'm confused as to why you think these have any relation to timing of manual task validation maintenance.

I assume you are talking about these 2, and here are my notes on them:

https://www.rnaworld.de/rnaworld/workun ... id=6330827
- Has no non-VM wingman
- I did not complete it outside of BOINC
- Was completed by an AMD processor, so estimates of completion on Intel are not accurate at all.
- When yours completes, BOINC will validate it automatically. Quorum 2, Replication 2.
- Has no effect on timing of manual task validation maintenance, to my knowledge.

https://www.rnaworld.de/rnaworld/workun ... id=6330943
- Has no non-VM wingman
- I did not complete it outside of BOINC
- Was completed, but with a ridiculously low time (1 week in 2014?) that indicates validation will likely fail.
- When yours completes, BOINC will either validate it automatically, or reissue to another wingman. Quorum 2, Replication 2.
- Has no effect on timing of manual task validation maintenance, to my knowledge.